Yes Thunderbolt is really just a high bandwidth cable but you can put a cluster interconnect on the far end instead of the CPU end. Which means someone could build a hub with namespace translation hardware for each machine embedded in the hub instead of the machine but no one has yet.

Funny to call it "semi-fail" when you provide a link to a Fibre-Channel adapter for $800.

How many Fibre-Channel clusters are there? (Not clusters using Fibre-Channel for storage - there are a lot. But clusters using Fibre-Channel for IPC....)

Look back a bit, linux2mac made several specific claims about using Apples and T-Bolt for clustering - all of them shown to be ludicrous since none of the systems proposed can support daisy-chaining.

But, still "crickets" if we're waiting for a response from her.

And, T-Bolt is not "just a high bandwidth cable" in the sense of being a general purpose network interconnect (or a special-purpose inter-processor link like InfiniBand). It's a extension of an internal bus to external cabinets, mostly master (CPU) - slave (IO device) except for limited peer-to-peer capability between specifically designed peers.

The only time multiple masters works is in porn videos.... Sharing slaves is a delicate situation.
__________________

These links about T-Bolt clustering are early mental masturbation exercises by people who didn't yet realize what T-Bolt really was. (And their not understanding T-Bolt is understandable, since the early information about T-Bolt was very high on hype and very low on facts - and many of those links are quite old.)

__________________
6 October 2014 - the day that the debate about marriage equality ended. And equality prevailed.

Is it perhaps one of those religious things, where Apple wants you to use NFS (the Nightmare File System) instead of CIFS (the Common Internet File System)? Or maybe there's a secret project to bring back AppleShare?

Huh, that was a long time without seeing anyone call CIFS to SMB (Satanic Mess of Bloat). Anything to do with religion either?

Huh, that was a long time without seeing anyone call CIFS to SMB (Satanic Mess of Bloat). Anything to do with religion either?

Nice try at a joke - but "Nightmare File System" gets 41K hits on Google, and "Satanic Mess of Bloat" gets 0. (Although it will probably soon have two hits.)

And not that you'd know or care, but the current CIFS release has very significantly improved the performance over turn of the century CIFS.

Quote:

SMB2

Microsoft introduced a new version of the Server Message Block (SMB) protocol (SMB 2.0 or SMB2) with Windows Vista in 2006. Although the protocol is proprietary, its specification has been published to allow other systems to interoperate with Microsoft operating systems that use the new protocol.

SMB2 reduces the 'chattiness' of the SMB 1.0 protocol by reducing the number of commands and subcommands from over a hundred to just nineteen.

It has mechanisms for pipelining, that is, sending additional requests before the response to a previous request arrives, thereby improving performance over high latency links.

It adds the ability to compound multiple actions into a single request, which significantly reduces the number of round-trips the client needs to make to the server, improving performance as a result. SMB1 also has a compounding mechanism — known as AndX — to compound multiple actions, but Microsoft clients rarely use AndX.

It also introduces the notion of "durable file handles": these allow a connection to an SMB server to survive brief network outages, as are typical in a wireless network, without having to incur the overhead of re-negotiating a new session.

If the Satanic Mess should be a dream by now, it's not working either!

Quote:

Originally Posted by AidenShaw

And what's with "RFC!" - is that a new religion?

Yep, it's the religion usually connected with common internet thingies. Which points to the rich (or should we say "shameless") irony in the "Common Internet" part in the CIFS name, even more so when Microsoft started some RFC standardization which fell apart.

(Huh, now I wonder why Microsoft didn't keep at that: it would be hilarious if they had named IE the "Mandatory Internet Browser", for example )

You probably were not offered said job!!! I have been using Macs since 1994 (uninterrupted) and mid-1990s was not a great batch of apple products! Not that Windows 95 was much better BUT at least you didn't have to worry about software compatibility with the rest of the (working) world around you

Actually I was; but I was also offered a better job a short time after as the Admin for a small marketing and design firm, and I did take that job (the commute was shorter too).

If only AutoCAD made a Mac version... oh wait.
And Office "pain and suffering"? Please. Any examples of that hyperbole (which, in reality, is about a half-decade out of date)

AutoCAD and Inventor Fusion to not a design house make.

If you don't believe me, come tell my 9 Inventor guys that they have been shunted to Mechanical. I wonder if it comes with a free slide rule to help you perform an FEA?

----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by nefan65

I've been in IT for 20 years, and everything you said is subjective, and opinion. It wreaks of "Job Security". Consumerization of IT is here, and will grow stronger. Opinions like yours are those of the old Mainframe guys...

Over time VDI, and similar will negate any client platform specific need. Granted it's in the infant stages, but it's growing rapidly. Even Microsoft sees it, and is changing their way of business...

I love it. Anyone who wants to deploy robust services right now using off-the-shelf products is a "dinosaur".

Meanwhile, your solution for my users to get to work right now is "Here's your iMac. VDI is coming...later. Even Microsoft sees it".

If you live in the real world and have real workers who need to do real work right now today, you don't sip your latte and tell people what you think is coming. In fact, my predecessor was fired for doing exactly that.

He gave the Engineers a 2d sketching application that is compatible with *nothing* called Graphite.

He gave everyone else very expensive macs, then when they wanted to do work he told them to connect to a Windows Terminal Server where they could run ERP, proper Excel, Sharepoint, and collaborate with other companies.

He had a building full of $2k iMacs and $3k Macbook Pros that were serving as Thin Clients...and running Entourage.

And Entourage is horrible!

Mac is not in the Enterprise. Mac has told the enterprise to pound salt.

I think this is a serious issue. But the more Mac penetration into corporate world there is, the more 3rd party software designers have to provide for OS-X.

This I don't agree with. I have a PC desktop at work. Pretty good spec. Windows 7. Works well most of the time. Makes me want to tear my hair out some time. But I still look forward to going home to my apple stuff. If I had the option of having an iMac at work, I would jump at the chance. But it won't happen for 3-4 years because most enterprise software is so aligned with microsoft platforms. Unstable. Yes. But, sadly, Mac incompatible.

----------

You probably were not offered said job!!! I have been using Macs since 1994 (uninterrupted) and mid-1990s was not a great batch of apple products! Not that Windows 95 was much better BUT at least you didn't have to worry about software compatibility with the rest of the (working) world around you

Hi all, I work as a consultant as an architect/engineer for Windows desktops for some some of the largest global enterprises with upwards of 50,000 seats, sometimes many more.

A client is talking about moving several thousands of Win PCs to Mac. As far as I can see this is for fashion reasons.

Not looking to get into a fanboi debate but very clearly Windows 7/8 is immensely more manageable en masse than Macs.

Question: I've googled like crazy but can't find real numbers or hard facts. Where are the largest install bases of Apple computers ? I'd like to discover some global firms that are running serious business predominantly on Macs. I'd like to then reach out to their IT desktop engineering leaders and learn the pros and cons of the platform from an enterprise management view.

I've certainly never worked in a business large enough to deploy anywhere near 50,000 seats -- so I'm not one of the people you're seeking here.

Regardless, I do work for an international company that uses about 50% Mac and 50% Windows.

Since many of our workers are highly mobile, we rely heavily on cloud based solutions. Honestly, that negates many of the differences you'd otherwise have supporting Mac vs. Windows.

My experience with remote deployment and management (for what it might be worth) is that clearly yes, Windows 7/8 has FAR more options available for it. That stands to reason, because it had a very big head-start in corporate/enterprise adoption. People are really only considering Macs for enterprise use today because all the iOS devices got through their doors, and there's that "halo effect" in action. (EG. This iPad/iPhone has worked so well for us, maybe we should consider Apple's other products too?)

If you're seeking remote control of user's desktops, I've really found no single better tool than LogMeIn. It's not the cheapest, but it's got excellent cross-platform compatibility and lets you organize large numbers of machines into sensible groups/lists. So you can log into the site and drill down to your "Accounting dept. - Building XY" and see just those systems, and which are powered on/off, etc. (On the Windows side, it even lets you reboot a PC into "safe mode" remotely and then take control of it for such things as remote virus/spyware cleanups. Very cool.)

For remote backup of workstations/notebooks? CrashPlan Pro is the best we've used. Fast and reliable cloud backup for both Mac and Windows, and fair pricing too.

Hi all, I work as a consultant as an architect/engineer for Windows desktops for some some of the largest global enterprises with upwards of 50,000 seats, sometimes many more.

A client is talking about moving several thousands of Win PCs to Mac. As far as I can see this is for fashion reasons.

Not looking to get into a fanboi debate but very clearly Windows 7/8 is immensely more manageable en masse than Macs.

Question: I've googled like crazy but can't find real numbers or hard facts. Where are the largest install bases of Apple computers ? I'd like to discover some global firms that are running serious business predominantly on Macs. I'd like to then reach out to their IT desktop engineering leaders and learn the pros and cons of the platform from an enterprise management view.

Hi all, I work as a consultant as an architect/engineer for Windows desktops for some some of the largest global enterprises with upwards of 50,000 seats, sometimes many more.

A client is talking about moving several thousands of Win PCs to Mac. As far as I can see this is for fashion reasons.

Not looking to get into a fanboi debate but very clearly Windows 7/8 is immensely more manageable en masse than Macs.

Question: I've googled like crazy but can't find real numbers or hard facts. Where are the largest install bases of Apple computers ? I'd like to discover some global firms that are running serious business predominantly on Macs. I'd like to then reach out to their IT desktop engineering leaders and learn the pros and cons of the platform from an enterprise management view.

Many thanks for any pointers of company names.

Humm let me think, one of the Largest and most profitable companies in the world with thousands of employees only use Macs. It's name begins with A.

On a serious note as more and more software solutions become cloud based, and therefore platform agnostic, using a Mac becomes a lot easier, and mobile devices are driving a lot of this change.

If you check out some of the sys admin presentations here (especially the AD ones), you'll see names like Nike, Disney, Yelp, etc referenced, but no specifics to specifically how many Macs they were running.

But I remember looking at it a while ago, and discovered it offered a lot of functionality (in a freeware product, no less) for deploying custom images to workstations on your network from a central server.

I believe it was the author of the very popular "Carbon Copy Cloner" imaging tool who steered me towards it, when I asked him about the possibility of adding some more functionality to his program that would allow more flexible corporate deployment of images. He said DeployStudio was right up my alley. (And again, it does both Mac and PC.)